[18] She repeated on cross-examination that she was busy and not paying attention to what was happening. She was at a distance and only saw them signing the paper. She was asked if she had seen Zehmer put the deal on the table before Lucy, and her response was, “When he walked by, he wrote everything it was on paper, Mr. Lucy reached out and said, `Let`s see. He took it and put it in his pocket before showing it to Mrs. Zehmer. Their version was that Lucy continued to increase her offer until she reached $50,000. While the court sometimes refers to Bailey and West as if they were directly related to each other, the Bailey case is also full of potential “agents.” A complex legal body determines who an agent is and what that agent is authorized to do on behalf of his or her “client.” Here are some sections of the Restatement (Third) of Agency (2006), [hereinafter Restament (Third)], which explain the basic legal rules that govern when a person has the legal power to enter into a contract for another person. People make all kinds of promises and statements in their daily lives, sometimes without knowing how others can interpret them. In fact, even an oral statement that resembles an offer can be legally interpreted as burdening you with contractual obligations that you may never have entered into.
Suppose John tells Doris that he will pay her $3,000 to take care of her children for the summer. Doris quits her less lucrative summer job in favor of John`s offer, but at the last minute, John greets an international student who will do the work for free. Doris could receive compensation from John for the loss of income she had suffered by relying on her promise. Now think about why people make promises. Why not just do the act? Why talk about it first? A promise may be made in words orally or in writing, or be derived in whole or in part from the conduct. One way to think about this case is whether the court should support Bailey`s or West`s expectations of the so-called boarding contract. Is there a common thread that can unite our efforts to analyze the expectations of the parties? What word could we use to describe the test used by the court to decide whether Bailey has the legal right to expect payment for boarding at Bascom`s Folly? [28] At no time prior to the performance of the contract had Zehmer informed Lucy in word or deed that he was not serious about the sale of the farm. They had argued at length about it and discussed its terms, as Zehmer admitted. Lucy testified that if there were any jokes, it was to pay $50,000 that night. The contract and the evidence show that he was not expected to pay the money that night. Zehmer said that after the letter was signed, he put it on the counter in front of Lucy.
Lucy said Zehmer gave it to her. In any case, there was something resembling a good faith offer and a good faith acceptance, followed by the performance and apparent delivery of a written contract. The two said Lucy put the police in her pocket and then offered Zehmer $5 to seal the case. It was only then, even among the testimonies of the accused, that something was said or done to suggest that the case was a joke. The two Zehmers testified that when Zehmer asked his wife to sign, he whispered that it was a joke that Lucy wouldn`t hear and that he wasn`t expected to hear. [19] The respondents insist that the evidence was sufficient to support their assertion that the letter seeking to be executed was prepared as a bluff or dared to force Lucy to admit that he did not have $50,000; that all this was just a joke; that the letter was not delivered to Lucy and that a binding contract was never concluded between the parties. [31] Thus, a person can only claim that he was joking if his conduct and words justified a reasonable person in believing that he intended to enter into a genuine agreement, 17 C.J.S., Contracts, § 47, at p. 390; Clark on Contracts, 4 ed., § 27, p. 54. [16] The key issue raised by this appeal with respect to entering into a quasi-contract is whether or not the Applicant acted as a “volunteer” at the time he accepted the horse for food on his farm. There is a long line of authorities who have clearly formulated the general rule: “If a service is provided by one person without the request of another person, it is very unlikely that that person will be legally required to pay compensation.” 1 A Corbin, contracts § 234.
If the contract involves a sale of goods (i.e. . B movable property) between traders, acceptance need not reflect the terms of the offer for a valid contract to exist, unless: [12] Based on our review of the records, we must conclude that the trial judiciary neglected and misunderstood the material evidence that does not call into question, that there was never between the parties any element essential to the formulation of a genuine contract, namely a contractual intention […].
